BrandSimple | BrandDigital: The Blog

Whether we like it or not, it’s a multi-tasking world. One of the reasons for this state of affairs is the plethora of innovative multi-tasking digital devices at our disposal. Mobile phones that take pictures, surf the Web, download music and give us GPS directions when we’re lost. The more digitally accelerated a gizmo, the better we like it. At the very least, it gives us bragging rights. At the very best, it makes us more productive.

So I just don’t get what Sony is thinking by aggressively marketing and advertising its Sony Reader? Yes, this different-looking, book-shaped electronic device is designed to allow us to easily download books and read on the go, but that’s all it can do.

For that I can buy a book-shaped book for about the same price as any of those in Sony’s library – without the need for batteries.

And if I really want to read books in a paperless way I can do it on an Apple iPhone that can also keep my pictures, music let me surf the web and call my book group buddies at the same time.

In my book, BrandSimple, I explain that the most powerful companies in the world establish a simple, differentiated meaning for their brands and ensure it’s something people will care about. Difference without relevance is a very expensive proposition, especially in the digital device category. While the high resolution print on the Sony Reader screen is impressive, it’s going to stay different for about the same amount of time it takes you to read this blog. Life in this category moves very fast. That’s why it’s called digital acceleration. While every other technology brand is working hard to figure out the next different and relevant multi-tasking combo to offer its busy users (including the ability to digitally embrace reading material), Sony seems to be lost behind the library stacks. I would suggest that before any more money is spent engineering the fine print, Sony step back, look at the big picture, and figure out how to differentiate itself in a meaningful way.

“A paradox, a paradox, how quaint the ways of paradox,” to paraphrase a Gilbert and Sullivan tune. Well, not quaint the ways of this paradox: Bottled water, that is. This booming business, this signal of healthy living is not healthy for the environment. Recent news reports tell us that all those plastic bottles are rapidly adding to the industrial emissions heating up our planet. Bottled water brands can stick their heads in the blazing sand and hope this green issue will go away, but it won’t. According to the recent Landor ImagePower® survey it’s picking up steam which could affect the bottled water business in a booming negative way. That’s why it’s not too hard to imagine that the first of these brands to develop a functional and stylish bottle that can be refilled or, at the very least, is manufactured to be environmentally harmless could be in a very advantageous category position. This proactive brand will endear itself to the growing number of consumers who carry their plastic bottles as a symbol of healthy living and even allow them to signal that their health-conscious attitude applies to the world, at large. As I think about it even more, it shouldn’t take too long for major cities to capitalize on this effort. The first city to officially brand its refreshing tap water and figure out an innovative way for its citizens to tote it around would find itself in a very advantageous position, as well. From a branding perspective, it’s no paradox that sometimes the best answers are right under your nose. Mayor Bloomberg, make some stylish NYC reusable water bottles, brand them “Bloomberg’s Best” and watch them help you turn NYC into the Greenest city in America!!

The only recent news story that may have gotten more press coverage than the release of Apple’s iPhone is the release of Paris Hilton. I’m not here to weigh in on that particular item. Rather, I would like to toss a brand question into the ring regarding the iPhone. What happens when one brand bets its future on the performance of another? By choosing AT&T as its exclusive carrier for the next two years Apple may be doing just that. Apple selected AT&T in part because the company allowed it to change everything people hated about cell phones. The problem is, one of the biggest things people hate about cell phones is still in AT&T’s arena: Its network and its reputation for inconsistent signals. While AT&T is working hard on next generation technology to remedy this, the brand’s reputation relative to call quality could have a negative effect on Apple’s grade-A reputation as a brand. The incredibly positive aura associated with the Apple brand could be diminished if the calling experience with the iPhone is less than Apple grade.

Now, generally, no one blames problems with their cell phone on the hardware. If there’s a problem, they assume it’s the carrier. This may mitigate any fallout to the Apple brand should the call experience with the iPhone be less than wonderful. While any brand partnership is a challenge, what remains to be seen in this case is whether Apple loyalists will be any less loyal if every aspect of the iPhone experience doesn’t live up to their expectations. Apple is, in a way, releasing the product with one hand tied behind its back.

And although the iPhone can be used one-handed, the brand may need both to defend itself against any less than stellar performance on its partner’s part. Stay tuned.

Terry Semel’s departure as CEO of Yahoo didn’t surprise me, just as it didn’t surprise anyone on Wall Street, in Silicon Valley, or any number of blogging technorati. The company’s profits have been slipping for awhile now, in good part as a result of its slipping efforts to narrow Google’s lead as a search engine. Replacing Mr. Semel with Jerry Yang, one of Yahoo’s co-founders, offers some hope that passion can be restored to the brand. After all, who better than the inventor of the brand to recharge its status? But, from a pure brand POV, it’s going to take a lot more than just a change at the top to restore Yahoo’s place as a leading brand in the online world. For this, Yahoo is going to have to figure out what it wants to stand for –not who is standing at its helm. In other words, it needs to identity a single, simple something that consumers can understand and that they associate with the Yahoo brand –and the Yahoo brand only.

In BrandSimple, I write about how the best brands in the world have always been built on simple, relevantly different ideas that drive everything they do and that set them apart from the competition. As a brand, especially a brand trying to make it in a digitally- accelerated universe, you simply can’t succeed by being a little bit good at everything. Right now, Yahoo’s a little bit good at search, a little bit good at content, at attracting advertisers, at email, at convenience. As of this week, they’re even a little bit good at providing coverage of college athletics, as indicated by the purchase of Rivals.com. It’s a little bit too late for this. To succeed, the company is going to have to establish one thing to be really, really good at – better than any other brand - and ensure we care. Unfortunately, I don’t think the answer is in going back to the future. Mr. Yang and his team may have the best of intentions and I wish them luck. But, from a pure brander’s POV, my prediction is that they company will be sold to a brand that knows what it stands for and why buying Yahoo will add to its standing.

A couple of months ago I wrote about Ford’s new Bold Moves branding campaign. I lauded the company for taking the initial steps required to revive its brand after years of tepid performance. Among the initiatives I cited was the introduction of the hybrid Ford Escape, a vehicle both fuel-efficient and environmentally friendly. I suggested that a really bold move for Ford would be an offer to replace New York City’s entire gas-guzzling, emission-spewing taxi fleet with these green vehicles – a public relations branding signal that would be good for Ford’s brand and great for the planet. While Ford was in no position to do so at the time, it seems that my suggestion was not all that preposterous. It appears New York City’s mayor, Michael R. Bloomberg, has a similar idea. In fact, he’d like to see all New York City cabs replaced with hybrid vehicles within the next five years as part of his PlaNYC which calls for reducing greenhouse emissions in the Big Apple 30 percent by the year 2030. In response to the challenge, Yahoo! immediately donated 10 Ford Escapes to get things rolling. While Ford may not have been in a position to do so a few months ago, I’d say there’s never been a better time than now for them to take the position of change agent in the quest to slow global warming. New York City’s environmental plan is far more extensive than that of any other major city. Converting its fleet of 13,000 yellow cabs to green would send a very strong signal to the world. Ford, by playing a significant role in this effort, would send, in turn, a very strong branding signal. A signal that would be an extremely hard one to equal in its category.

A recent article in the Wall Street Journal talked about how the Lenovo Group’s newest advertising touts the durability and superior engineering of its soon to be launched ThinkPads. While computers that can survive underwater adventures and exposure to deep-freeze conditions are certainly worth talking about, there’s a much bigger story in this article – albeit, a few paragraphs down the page. Lenovo is also about to launch one of the most expensive laptops on the market – a $5,000 notebook computer aimed at top corporate executives. Yes, the price tag is big befitting the computer’s stellar performance, but the bigger story here is the fact that these top-tier computers come with an unprecedented level of support service – platinum level service, if you will. If you run into trouble, a Lenovo tech will meet you in person to solve the issue. No tele-helper in India requesting the model number of the machine. No annoying automated list of tele-menu options. Instead, real live technical support when you need it. From a brand perspective, the newsworthy story in the WSJ article is that Lenovo has identified a way to change a key dynamic in a commodity market – the after-sale user experience. While good quality has become a cost of entry in the computer industry, peace of mind relative to the after-sale experience is a potentially game-changing move. We all know that no matter how solid any piece of technology may be, it isn’t a matter of if you’ll need assistance, but when. Providing assurance that help will actually be there when you need it is a relevantly different, yet simple brand idea. Who has time to wait these days, especially when business comes to a halt? Yes, a number of computer companies offer good post-sales assistance, Apple among them. But not one has yet to offer the level of help that Lenovo plans to provide. Differentiating its brand in this way is not only a big idea, it’s a smart one.

The current Lamisil TV spot for its athlete’s foot treatment does more than demonstrate how to get effective relief from this itchy condition. It demonstrates how to make effective use of sock puppets. Actually, I’m being serious. Despite the best efforts of Pets.com to put its adorable sock puppet dog to good use in the 1990’s, it turned out that consumers loved the cute little scamp with its wry humor, but couldn’t remember the name of the company it represented. It wasn’t relevant enough a branding signal for them to make the connection. Lamisil, on the other hand - um, foot - is using its sock puppets in an incredibly relevant, not to mention clever way. In its ad which takes place in a locker room, a variety of sock-puppet’s talk about feet. Come on. What could possibly be more natural for a sock to talk about than feet? The amusing spot takes the conversation about athlete’s foot out of its generally staid, medicinal space and makes it entertaining in a meaningful way. It’s hard these days to find a branding signal that gets peoples’ attention for reasons you want them to pay attention. The key is to make it captivating, but relevant. Socks that talk about athlete’s foot are both. These smelly guys are also pretty funny. Seriously.

Landor has just released its 2007 ImagePower® Survey looking at green issues and green brands and, not surprisingly, it confirms what intuition would tell us. More and more Americans—40%, in fact—have gotten the message that global warming poses a major threat. More than 50% believe existing environmental initiatives aren’t enough to address the problem. Whether it’s the result of Al Gore’s Academy Award-winning documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, or the increasing volume of business and political discussion from Thomas Friedman on down, green is definitely on the national radar screen. As such, more and more companies are beginning to look at the problem as more than a matter of concern to just tree-hugging fanatics living on the fringe of society. While, again, not surprising, when asked to identify the “greenest” brands, those in the survey did specify a number of brands that have been in the eco-space for years, Whole Foods, Wild Oats, the Body Shop, Aveda, and Toyota among them. The environmental positioning of these brands has been clear to consumers for some time. What was surprising, however, was that those surveyed also identified GE as worthy of a spot on the survey’s list of top ten greenest brands. Surprising, but heartening. And, an indication that this growing concern is leading to a growing awareness far beyond the fringe.

GE is about as unfringe-y as a brand can get. Yet, here is GE setting the bar for any huge, industrial company looking for the right way to enter the green space. First of all, it has assigned a senior executive to oversee the responsibility. Lorraine Bolsinger leads ecomagination, GE’s company-wide commitment to addressing environmental challenges on a global level and she has taken on the substantiation of the sub-branded program incredibly well. Stories on the ecomagination Web site call attention to everything from GE’s answers to cleaner, more efficient sources of energy to its on-going efforts in reducing greenhouse gases. Research and Development investments in the area have grown exponentially. In addition, Jeff Immelt, CEO of GE, has gotten out in front of the program in a major way, a key proof point for any brand looking to walk the green walk, not just talk it. Despite that only a small percentage of GE’s products are environmentally related versus, say, the Body Shop’s where all are geared in that direction, GE has been able to plant itself firmly as a leader in the space early on. This is something that will serve them well as the issue continues to grow in scope and public concern. Needless to say there is no more fringe. GE’s efforts will serve all of us well.

I talk in my book, BrandSimple, about the fact that Jerry Seinfeld would make a great branding guy. The comedian has the uncanny ability to see ordinary things from a different perspective. One of the greatest challenges to building a successful brand is having the knack to look at any of the most ordinary things, no matter how much of a commodity they may be, and find a different way in. The guys at Cereality have done just that. (The fact that Jerry’s a cereal fan is but a strange coincidence.) David Roth and Rick Bacher looked at the way people eat cereal, not just for breakfast, but for lunch, for dinner, and for snacking. They looked at where people eat cereal, not just in the kitchen, but in the living room, in their offices, and in their cars. And, as Jerry might have said, they said, “Hey, ever wonder why there isn’t a cereal restaurant?” There is now. Actually there are lots of Cereality cereal cafes snap, crackle, and popping up all over the country. The founders obviously identified a new way of looking at cereal and at the fast food category. Pajama-clad Cereologists™ stand ready to dish out your choice of over 40 cereal brands - mix and match any concoction you wish – with your choice of milk, from skim to whole to soy to chocolate. With store interiors designed to include the spaces where people feel most comfortable eating cereal - kitchens, living rooms and dining rooms, Cereality retail outlets have become popular with cereal aficionados from coast to coast. It’s a perfect example of brand innovation at its best. Take something so simple, so obvious and get people to say, “Hey, why didn’t I think of that.” Well, David Roth and Rick Bacher did think of it. They looked at something as ordinary as breakfast cereal and found a different way to serve it up. By the way, I’ll have Wheat Chex with Fruity Pebbles and soy milk, please. Let me find out what Jerry’s having.

The second annual Brandz™ Top 100 Most Powerful Brands ranking was just published by Millward Brown Optimor and it’s an incredibly valuable read. I like it a lot for a few reasons. First, it’s got a rock-solid foundation having been built on consumer insight data from Data Monitor and financial data from Bloomberg. Second, it ranks both consumer and corporate brands as measured by their dollar value. And third, I like it because it confirms that what I talk about in BrandSimple is built on rock-solid branding principles. What’s not to like, as my relatives would say.

It came as no surprise to me that the top-ranking brands in the Brandz study are those based on crisp, clear, simple ideas –the underlying premise of BrandSimple. Google, for example, up 77% over last year, is based on the simple idea that the smartest kid in your class – the one with all the answers - is sitting right on your desktop. Apple, another winner, is up 55%. Ask anyone which brand is responsible for creating the coolest, user-friendliest technology and you’ll know why this is so. Target, whose simple idea is making cheap chic is up 88% versus last year. And Best Buy, up a whopping 113%, proves that the simple, “Geeky” idea of a retailer who helps consumers understand how to actually use the technology they purchase is pretty smart.

While all of the above brands are, indeed, based on simple ideas, these ideas are also relevantly different from what the competition promises. Another topic I address in BrandSimple and something reflected in a few of the brand rankings. For example, Dell promises to “make it my way.” Different, yes, but I’m not sure how relevant this is to consumers anymore, which is, perhaps, why Dell is down 24%. Intel, too, has lost value over last year – 26%. The brand, which once differentiated itself by representing faster, more powerful chip capacity, isn’t differentiating itself quite as well these days. “Intel Inside” seems to have strayed. Even Microsoft has lost over 10% in valuation, perhaps related to the too-little-too-late launch of Zune, or maybe just because it’s difficult to differentiate a brand on sheer size.

Back to the upside, however, it’s interesting to see that a number of the winning brands were those that leveraged major market trends effectively, demonstrating that brands are listening to what consumers have to say. Brands that delivered on the promise of social responsibility, especially with regard to environmental issues, did very well. BP, by addressing the climate change with alternative fuels, rose in valuation. Toyota, too, benefited from its environmental stance. Food brands that showed a concern for healthier eating also gained in value, most prominently McDonald’s. As the only brand ranking that combines consumer insight data with hard financial data, the Millward Brown Brandz study is a significant piece of data in and of itself. It’s an interesting and telling read for anyone who wants to know what makes some brands more powerful than others. It’s rock solid.

Complete list